|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - wordplanet
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... 46
426
« on: March 14, 2016, 14:14 »
Anyone have any idea on how income (over $600) earned one on foreign website, but never gets reported to IRS are treated? They don't send out 1099s and they have no mention of taxes on their website at all.
You report it, like any other income.
+1
427
« on: March 14, 2016, 13:33 »
Shady Sue,
I'm in the UK newspaper scheme and despite those $6-10 licenses and other piddly ones, my average gross sale on Alamy has gone from about $30-40 ($15-20 net) for the past few years (after sales prices dropped circa 2012-2013) to around $75 gross ($30+net) since 2015 when prices seemed to improve. I'm in the US so I probably get fewer UK newspaper sales than you do as you're from Scotland (am I right?), so I have fewer to drag down my average, but bottom line I'm earning more per license and seeing more sales this past year. I have a mix of RF and RM sales, though most of my portfolio is RM. Prices appear to average about the same for both - I'm guessing RM is similar to RF even though RF gives you greater usage, because with RM even if non-exclusive they can be pretty sure it's not out there on hundreds of other websites/books/magazines.
Most of my Alamy images are not on the micros.
428
« on: March 14, 2016, 13:17 »
The important take away here is that whether or not you receive a 1099, the sums you make from microstock are income that needs to be reported to the IRS.
I believe that the those who have said the royalties reported to you from the agencies should be treated as income on a Schedule C are correct but you should always check with your accountant - I'm giving you the benefit of my opinion here and am not an accountant, but there is no $10 or $600 minimum threshold before you have to report microstock income to the IRS, even if there are minimums before the agencies have to report them to you.
If you don't file a Schedule C it's still income.
No opinion as to how stock royalty income is to be treated for those not in the US.
430
« on: March 11, 2016, 14:37 »
Your efforts to reshoot the place paid off in a nice way, well done! 
But where can you check whether the image was "zoomed"? I checked my Alamy port but still don't get if it shows the "views" of my photos..
Thanks. I was happy to see it pay off. When you go into Alamy Measures/Your Images you'll see numbers highlighted under the "Zooms" column and when you click on that number it shows you the photos that have been zoomed. You can also change the date parameters to see those you've missed. And when you click on each pseudonym you can see the keywords that your images showed up for for all your views. Keep in mind that Alamy only tracks views and zooms for a certain set of customers, so you are probably getting more views and more zooms than are shown. I often get sales on photos that weren't zoomed but it's helpful to see how your photos are doing in searches.
431
« on: March 10, 2016, 11:23 »
I had a $250 sale pop up this morning. It's a new photo that I uploaded in October. On Alamy images don't usually get licensed on day one - it was "zoomed" a month ago and that same search term (it's a rare one - there are only 41 images on Alamy - 6 of them mine) was searched for back in September because an image I took in 2007 was zoomed then, which is why when I took a trip to shoot stock I made sure to go back and get newer photos of that obscure travel location. So someone was looking for a very specific image - and they kept looking and found what they wanted several months later. I think the mindset of the average Alamy customer is different - they are more traditional photo researchers/buyers rather than small businesses, bloggers, web news outlets looking for a quick inexpensive image to put online - though there are many of those buyers on Alamy too. I wouldn't put an image like that on the micros since I know someone will pay more for it. (There are 9 of the same subject on SS).
Though my primary photography income is from assignments, I've been with both Alamy and SS since 2009 and while I have small portfolios on each, I get regular sales on both (for the most part 1-4 monthly on Alamy and daily on SS) so I'm very aware of the differences between the two - Alamy requires more patience but the payoff can be much greater.
Being there also means not uploading some images which might do quite well on the micros to them, and instead putting them on places like Alamy and 500px, hoping the better prices will make it worth the choice. That's sometimes been a tough decision for me - will an image be downloaded hundreds of times on the micros so I should put it there rather than wait for one license on Alamy to make me as much? I've seen zooms of images I have RF on both get licensed from micros so it is a risk. Since I license RM and RF images directly to magazines and calendars and others, for me, putting them on Alamy rather than the micros also has other benefits, since I can charge traditional licensing fees. Selling direct at micro prices seems impossible to me.
Both types of agencies - midstock/traditional and micro - have their similarities and differences and their pros and cons. Just don't expect your experience on Alamy to be the same as your experience at FT or SS. I'd give it two years before deciding if it is worth the effort. That's when most people I know there (me included) started seeing regular sales rather than just the occasional one.
432
« on: March 09, 2016, 19:03 »
As someone who shoots editorial images and mostly puts the outtakes on Alamy, this seems like it could actually be a good thing if the deal brings more customers seeking editorial images to SS.
433
« on: March 08, 2016, 15:01 »
I find the process can be tedious, but since I do a lot of travel and nature photography, I learn a lot when I'm keywording and I enjoy that aspect, though my natural curiosity means I spend a lot more time than I need to - often getting lost in the history of someplace and learning far more than I need for keywording.
I have some lovely botanical and bird books, but mostly do my research online and have a ton of sites bookmarked for various kinds of images. I'm also a freelance writer, so I enjoy the research aspect.
Arranging them in order for FT and differently for Alamy and cutting down from 50 to 30 for some sites, is a PITA and obviously the part that even those of us who may enjoy the research hate. If I have large numbers of images with similar keywords, after I keyword in LR I sometimes make a document in Pages so I can rearrange the words and get a word count, then work from there after upload. That is boring and tedious but with a small port my RPI is high, so I know it's important and I've always felt that good keywording helped my sales.
434
« on: March 08, 2016, 01:09 »
Alamy and DT were strong and SS was the worst it's been in a very long time. Weird month, though I've seen a steady uptick on Alamy which I like since sales there are higher value so an uptick can be significant. FT was steady but with a very small port (<100 files), too few sales there to see any trends other than that sales are much better since Adobe took over.
There seems to be a lot of volatility right now. It will be interesting to see which sites are on top a year from now. I'm encouraged that Alamy, which pays a fair commission and charges more for most licenses, is moving up. I hope that's a harbinger of things to come and not just a one-month anomaly.
I still feel that SS is strong as a company and am considering applying to Offset. I'd be interested to know how people are doing there, but can't seem to find much information.
435
« on: March 07, 2016, 23:23 »
Your training as a designer shows - all your photos have nice copy space.
I shoot a lot of travel and I find that and simple (i.e. uncluttered) but interesting shots with copy space do well for me on the micros.
I really like the vibe of your tent shot. It took me a minute to figure out what it was but it really drew me in.
Good luck.
436
« on: March 06, 2016, 10:16 »
Why do people doubt the accuracy of the poll? Sales with Alamy can vary significantly month to month because the possibility of large sales and even a few smaller ones grossing $100 each can quickly add up. As others have said, if you check out the Alamy forum, you'll see that sales are up recently for a lot of people. It's not like the number is so huge as to be unbelievable. Does everything have to be doom and gloom here?
If you had $180 of sales gross, you'd net $90, which would mean you'd tick $100 on the poll, a third of that is $33 which is roughly what the poll is showing. Many people earn more than $180 there in a month, if a few people made those $1,000+ gross sales, even if it was just one, that $500 net would quickly move Alamy up here. It will be interesting to see where they are next month, hopefully still in the top tier.
437
« on: March 06, 2016, 10:09 »
If they printed more than a certain number, then they need an EL - that number depends on which stock site it was licensed from. Using it in print is permitted under a general license, but if they printed more than say 500,000, depending on the stock site, then they need an EL. Hope that clarifies it for you.
I hope you picked up a brochure. When you see such a massive use, it makes you feel like even the EL isn't really payment enough.
438
« on: March 04, 2016, 00:18 »
Congrats - hope you all do well on Alamy.
439
« on: March 03, 2016, 18:50 »
Alamy was my best agency this month, followed by DT, then SS, then FT. Next month, who knows? But Alamy has been one of my top two for the past few months. FT has been steady but it hasn't caught up to my better agencies yet. (DT nearly always beats the forum average for me, but it's usually in third place). The fact that Alamy has been beating SS to me is more significant. My sales there are a mix of RF and RM - my best price this month there was an RF for $99.99, netting me $49.48, better than I'd get for an EL, though it would cost the buyer the same if it had been available on the micros.
Good to hear that! How long have you been contributing to Alamy? Just curious as it is now a common knowledge that Alamy takes time and patience 
Thanks. I started with Alamy in 2009, before I joined any of the micros. It took a good part of the first year before I made my first sale, versus making daily sales on SS with just a handful of images, so it's very different and does require patience. I've been getting fairly steady sales, though the amounts this past year range from $6.38 to $400, with many in the $35-75 range. I have a small portfolio - under 1000 images - with a mix of editorial, travel and some concept images. Most of what I have on Alamy is not on the micros. I license both RM and RF images there and have seen prices come down from when I started, when sales in the $150-200 range were more common, but volume seems to be increasing and there are still some nice prices. I think they treat contributors fairly and they are very nice to deal with. When I first started with Live News they even called me from London to get captions when a batch didn't upload properly. I like that personal touch. Some years ago they invited a bunch of us to their office in Brooklyn when they first came to the states - and I wasn't a big producer for them but they treat everyone well.
440
« on: March 03, 2016, 10:34 »
Alamy was my best agency this month, followed by DT, then SS, then FT. Next month, who knows? But Alamy has been one of my top two for the past few months. FT has been steady but it hasn't caught up to my better agencies yet. (DT nearly always beats the forum average for me, but it's usually in third place). The fact that Alamy has been beating SS to me is more significant. My sales there are a mix of RF and RM - my best price this month there was an RF for $99.99, netting me $49.48, better than I'd get for an EL, though it would cost the buyer the same if it had been available on the micros.
441
« on: February 21, 2016, 23:43 »
The Olympus has a wide range of lenses available and you can also use lenses made by for other micro 4/3rds cameras. I have an adapter that lets me use my old Zuiko lenses from my Olympus OM-1 film camera but I haven't looked into getting an adapter for my Nikon lenses so I'm not sure what is available. I have a 17mm (~35mm equivalent), a 25mm (50mm equivalent) and a 40-150mm zoom that was very inexpensive but is tack-sharp all the way to 150mm. Due to the crop factor each lens is equivalent to double - I use my old 200mm prime (~400mm) with the adapter and like that too.When I travel I can fit the camera and the three small lenses into a shoulder camera bag which is so easy!
Not to hijack the thread either but I'm curious if you can use a Nikon SB-600 flash unit on the OM-D E1?
442
« on: February 21, 2016, 13:20 »
I have the Olympus OMD E-1 too - as well as three Nikons - and I love the little Olympus for travel. It is small super light and tough.
443
« on: February 21, 2016, 10:11 »
Thanks for sharing your viewpoint. Very interesting to hear about the Chinese market from someone who's there.
444
« on: February 17, 2016, 22:00 »
Thanks for the info Mat - it's good news.
445
« on: February 17, 2016, 21:58 »
I got mine (from Getty) around 2 weeks ago. They must be sent out by February 15 so you should get it soon.
446
« on: February 17, 2016, 11:01 »
IMHO New York and San Francisco have very distinct skylines. Yes, I'm from NY but it sure didn't look like San Francisco to me either. And shouldn't the keywords Vancouver, San Francisco and New York have given them some sort of clue to look a little closer? Not defending the keyword spamming but I don't think the ad agency is blameless for the mistake.
448
« on: February 16, 2016, 10:52 »
449
« on: February 12, 2016, 15:51 »
I have a very small port on FT after re-joining late last year. Making payout much faster than in the past with fewer files. Hoping to get my entire SS port up there eventually though they have rejected a bunch of my light blurs and similar backgrounds which are strong sellers for me elsewhere, and of course they don't take editorial images.
Overall, it has been worth the effort.
450
« on: January 21, 2016, 13:39 »
Martha, thanks for the hint about exclusivity for some images on FT. I have a bunch of exclusives on DT which I think is why my sales there often beat the average. I may give it a try on FT too and see how that works. I just joined recently have a very small port there, but it's picking up. SS is very busy for me this month too with many more ODDs and SODs than I've seen in quite a while, but no Els there since November.
It's worth a try to test some images as exclusives on different sites. I don't have any exclusives anywhere else but on FT. Never did that on DT and of course can't do it on SS.
But several of my good 2015 images that cranky-and-unpredictable SS reviewers didn't accept have done well on FT, so after a few of those sales I realized I should make them exclusives there. Hard to say what the best long-term strategy is. Experimentation seems a good idea.
Congrats for being successful at SS this month. Your port is unusual, so something there must be striking a chord.
Thanks Martha! Just plugging away. SS seems to license all different kinds of images for me so I guess having a varied port works for me there, even though I don't have much in the way of traditional lifestyle stock. FT is picking up too.
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... 46
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
